We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Freedom of Religion Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Secular Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: March 2424
Description[?]:
| - |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The governments stance on religious schools.
Old value:: All schools are required to be religious in nature.
Current: Any religion may set up a school, but they are strictly regulated.
Proposed: Only recognised religions may set up religious schools, with no regulations.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 23:31:34, June 24, 2007 CET | From | Luthori Christian Women's Association | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | We are sympathetic to Artlcle 2, but aren't keen on Article 1. Belinda Braithwaite (Leader of the LCWA) |
| Date | 00:12:49, June 25, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | We had just realized that article 2 is mentioned in another bill. Thus, we removed it. As for article 1, are you against it because it doesn't allow all religions to set up schools or because it makes the public school system no longer religious in nature? |
| Date | 03:27:39, June 25, 2007 CET | From | Teleurstelling Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | We are against this because with out regulations the quality of both curriculum and the actual care of the students may become sub par merely to save on the bottom line. |
| Date | 04:26:32, June 25, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Then don't you think the parents will have their kids moved to another school if that were the case? |
| Date | 07:45:08, June 25, 2007 CET | From | Teleurstelling Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | That is absurd. Obviously you are without children. Working parents do not go tooling about the country side evaluating schools, doing a comparative study of over all progress of each institution. Most parents are not qualified to address curriculum issues. Your statement is equal to saying that people will stop being mugged because they will learn where the muggers are. If a school is newly opened how will one know? Oh I know the kids will say they dont like attending the new school...and that will of course provoke an investigation by the parents. Am I am the damned representative to have taken a course in logic, or perhaps just strategic communication or merely considered the definition of critical thinking? |
| Date | 10:41:36, June 25, 2007 CET | From | Luthori Christian Women's Association | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | My party believes every school should off an excellent, solid Christian religious education. Belinda Braithwaite (Leader of the LCWA) |
| Date | 10:46:04, June 25, 2007 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Do the Falls Party not follow the obvious pattern that the more government is involved with schools, the worse they get? As a parent and husband of a teacher I see this all the time. Why else would the wealthy pay extortionate school fees to send their kids to schools without government regulation and curriculums, when they could go to a local authority school for free? |
| Date | 19:21:21, June 25, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | To the Falls Party, the internet does wonders for those who know how to use it. To the LCWA, what about those kids who have parents who aren't Christians? |
| Date | 20:45:37, June 25, 2007 CET | From | Luthori Christian Women's Association | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Those children who are not Christians or have parents who are not Christians will still have the advantage of being prepared for life in a Christian country. Belinda Braithwaite (Leader of the LCWA) |
| Date | 00:24:25, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | We agree with the LCWA on this. |
| Date | 01:47:55, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Isn't allowing diversity to develop important? |
| Date | 06:31:51, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Teleurstelling Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Government regulation equals a minimum standard. No regulation means no minimum standard. Ah the internet, because every word on the internet is Gospel truth...I never fail to be astounded at the completely simple minded statements made by members of this body. . |
| Date | 09:26:21, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Government regulation equals a minimum standard, yes. A very minimum standard that it drags all schools down to, trying to meet its absurd curriculums and teaching children to "jump through hoops" in order to pass regular tests instead of actually learning and, just as importantly in junior school, having fun. No regulation means a competitive market place and empowers the parents with a choice of genuinely different schools and curriculums. |
| Date | 14:55:14, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | "Ah the internet, because every word on the internet is Gospel truth...I never fail to be astounded at the completely simple minded statements made by members of this body." You'd be surprised how useful the internet is. Sometimes, you can even control parties within a country using the internet. |
| Date | 22:19:10, June 26, 2007 CET | From | Imperial Vodka and Pimm's Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | "Isn't allowing diversity to develop important?" Please tell us why it would be? |
| Date | 15:12:20, June 27, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Diversity helps bring about tolerance and positive aspects of other people's culture. |
| Date | 21:24:11, June 27, 2007 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | What, foreign cultures? They have no "positive aspects" - only aspects that are different to Holy Imperial ideals! |
| Date | 00:04:43, June 28, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Xenophobia. |
| Date | 00:13:51, June 28, 2007 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Patriotism |
| Date | 16:50:10, June 28, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Diversity does not compromise patriotism. |
| Date | 01:40:04, June 29, 2007 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Multiculturalism compromises Luthoran culture and our unique Holy Imperial identity. |
| Date | 21:25:22, June 29, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Then let us have a Luthori melting pot instead. After all, that is very different than flatout multiculturism. |
| Date | 23:36:18, July 01, 2007 CET | From | Radical Reform Alliance (RRA) | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Against... definetely |
| Date | 01:16:09, July 04, 2007 CET | From | Crusader Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Infidels should not be allowed to attend school with good, Christian children. |
| Date | 14:08:40, July 04, 2007 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Hear hear! |
| Date | 15:57:49, July 04, 2007 CET | From | Secular Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Religion Act |
| Message | Sickening bigots. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 17 | |||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 83 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Party organizations are eligible for deletion if they are over 50 in-game years old, do not have at least 1 active member or are historically significant and possess historically significant information. |
| Random quote: "We are told that this is an odious and unpopular tax. I never knew a tax that was not odious and unpopular with the people who paid it." - John Sherman |